ArcadianRefugee:Popcorn Johnny: make me some tea: How is it people do not understand the concept of consent?

A 15 year old can't legally consent to sex in almost the entire country.

There is so much wrong with this simple sentence I am not sure where to begin.

OK, how about for starters:

* The FDA is a Federal organization; individual state laws don't really come into play. Pretty sure a state can still say "no" if they want (they just can't say "yes" if the FDA says "no"). I could be wrong on this latter sentence, but the former holds.

* A married 15-year-old can legally have as much sex as he or she wishes.

* A metric shiatload (~2.287 imperial shiatloads) of states do indeed have the AoC at 16; however, the vast majority of these states also have a "safe range" where such sex is not a crime. For instance, in TexasThe Texas Penal Code states that "It is an affirmative defense to the prosecution under Subsection (a)(2) that:

• The actor cannot be more than 3 years older than the victim.• The victim was older than 14 years of age at the time the offense occurred.....That's just one. Most states have some form of Age Gap provision. Even in states where it is illegal, most will probably not prosecute.

I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. I can think of plenty of other reasons why he thinks I want to subjugate and control women, despite numerous posts here to the contrary (how many times do I have to explicitly declare I support abortion rights?).

trialpha:hardinparamedic: Because our society has deemed it unacceptable that a man can force a woman to undergo an invasive and physically and emotionally taxing procedure against her will.

This is the correct decision, and I doubt many are arguing against it.

But it raises the question - why is it then acceptable for the women (by nature of her decision to keep the child) to force a man to pay 18 years of child support (depending on the man's circumstances, physically and emotionally taxing) against his will?

Again. Birth control for everyone who wants it regardless of ages. My body my choice right.

as far as womens rights goes. In north america its a dead issue. Women are given leeway and shown favoratism in every aspect of our society. From education to the legal system and everything in between.

if women want to fight for other women. Go the fark to saudi arabia. Cause here in north america feminism = not so cleverly disguised sexism.

Course ladies if you want to gang up on men your welcome to.but think of what would happen if as a gender men said "fark it. No more"

Just saying. Us vs them is a stupid battle. But it is one that women cant win. Cant even really fight.

equality is good. Sticking it to the opposite gender cause you heard things were hard for you gender generations ago is retarted.

boys vs girls is something used by teachers in grade school.it is not a method with wich to conduct ones life

You don't give a shiat about rights. Or the responsibilities those rights bring you.

You just want to do whatever you want without having to face up to any consequences. And to me, that's sickening. Period. You want the ability to create victims with no reciprocation in the matter.

GoldSpider:Your irrational phobia of and hatred for people with a differing opinion you care not to understand amuses me. Rage more, please.

Oh, I see. When someone points out how idiotic you're acting and talking, it's an "irrational phobia". When someone calls you out for wanting to use your penis as an excuse to fark around with anyone with absolutely no consequences for not being responsible, it's "A differing opinion you care not to understand".

In reality, I do understand your opinion, far more than you realize. And I still find it insulting and disgusting. You want to perpetuate the idea that, in reality, men are too weak and inept to decide where and when they spill their seed, so they need to have "special rights" to decide how to rule the lives of others because of that, while decrying the existence of "special rights" for those other people.

You're nothing but an annoying, misogynistic hypocrite. And you deserve to be called to the carpet for it.

GoldSpider:JenFromTheWood: And reiterated that while I do not condone her having sex (she hasn't yet) if something should ever happen and she has a reason to think contraception may have failed, to let me know immediately as she would now have a back up.

Now you may never know, on both counts.

GoldSpider-you're right that I may never know when she begins having sex. But I do know we talk a lot, she is on bc and is also very aware of the need to still use condoms, blah blah...so while I may not know when it happens, I am comfortable that she will tell me if she is ever in trouble. And I do this all while still managing to be a good person, unlike what the Jesus freaks would have us believe.

I just read a story complaining that women were "underrepresented in faculty leadership positions"... when their numbers showed them to be completely proportional to their portion of the total faculty.

//Which is still a problem for entirely different reasons, but come the fark on.

Oh okay, so it's up to the government to raise our kids. Thanks for giving me the official Fark position.

And thanks for educating us! Today I Learned that "parents should always know if their kids are accessing reproductive health services" is a new smokescreen for shaming women about their sexual awareness. Slut-shaming not working? Why not start hitting them even younger? Won't someone think of the children?

There you go with the imagination again. Johnny hasn't said why he wants to know what his kids are doing. He hasn't said what he'd do about a pregnant daughter.

I'm not sure there's anything more pathetic than whiny entitled men acting like victims. And yet they're so abundant when you give them an internet connection and anonymity. Some day men will get a fair shake in this country, nay -- this world! And you brave keyboard warriors are leading the charge. Onward, eternally victimized men! Towards victory!

teenage mutant ninja rapist:Man why cant more women think like this.common sense is the best approach to anything.liberalismconservatism.why cant the world as a whole embrace.pragmatism?

Because women's rights are a strange thing. Women want absolute rights - which we absolutely should have over our own bodies - but can't see that men should have rights, too. The idea of forcing a woman into motherhood is unconscionable to most people, but the same people think compelling a man to fatherhood is "holding him accountable" and "living up to his responsibility." I don't see how the two go hand-in-hand. If the decision to abort or not is ultimately the woman's, as it should be because it is her body and her health on the line, then it should be her decision on how she'll support the kid if she has it. If a man truly wants nothing to do with it, he should be able to sign away all responsibility -- and rights.

This is especially true when there are a lot of men tricked by women "on the pill" (who aren't) or other such situations, but I fail to see why it should matter.

Ideally, people would discuss what they would do in case of pregnancy before being intimate and come to a mutual agreement in advance, but let's be real. We're not often in our greatest common sense mode when we're about to get laid. Nobody should be punished or forced into a life or an obligation they don't want as a result of not thinking it through properly. I also realize this is a really unpopular opinion. All of this said? If men weren't pretty much default on the hook if a woman has a baby, how many women would be FAR more careful about what they were doing in general, and how many "ooops" pregnancies simply wouldn't happen?

GoldSpider:I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. I can think of plenty of other reasons why he thinks I want to subjugate and control women, despite numerous posts here to the contrary (how many times do I have to explicitly declare I support abortion rights?).

I'm not infuriated by you in the least, so please stop patting yourself on the back like you're making me mad.

And it has nothing to do with being for, or against, abortion. Do you HONESTLY think that's what this conversation boils down to?

The fact of the matter is, yes. When you want to put up the idea that "Either you let me decide to abort an unwanted fetus or I should not have to pay for the next 18 years whargarbl", yes. You are seeking to subjugate and control someone.

trialpha:hardinparamedic: Because our society has deemed it unacceptable that a man can force a woman to undergo an invasive and physically and emotionally taxing procedure against her will.

This is the correct decision, and I doubt many are arguing against it.

But it raises the question - why is it then acceptable for the women (by nature of her decision to keep the child) to force a man to pay 18 years of child support (depending on the man's circumstances, physically and emotionally taxing) against his will?

Child support isn't something women have forced on men - it's something that's there in the interests of the child. Women pay child support too, in cases where it's the man raising the child by himself.

as far as womens rights goes. In north america its a dead issue. Women are given leeway and shown favoratism in every aspect of our society. From education to the legal system and everything in between.

if women want to fight for other women. Go the fark to saudi arabia. Cause here in north america feminism = not so cleverly disguised sexism.

Course ladies if you want to gang up on men your welcome to.but think of what would happen if as a gender men said "fark it. No more"

Just saying. Us vs them is a stupid battle. But it is one that women cant win. Cant even really fight.

equality is good. Sticking it to the opposite gender cause you heard things were hard for you gender generations ago is retarted.

boys vs girls is something used by teachers in grade school.it is not a method with wich to conduct ones life

hardinparamedic:teenage mutant ninja rapist: Ah. So its ok to preach the rights of a woman.but the rights of a man are mockable?

Equality for everyone!!!

You don't give a shiat about rights. Or the responsibilities those rights bring you.

You just want to do whatever you want without having to face up to any consequences. And to me, that's sickening. Period. You want the ability to create victims with no reciprocation in the matter.

GoldSpider: Your irrational phobia of and hatred for people with a differing opinion you care not to understand amuses me. Rage more, please.

Oh, I see. When someone points out how idiotic you're acting and talking, it's an "irrational phobia". When someone calls you out for wanting to use your penis as an excuse to fark around with anyone with absolutely no consequences for not being responsible, it's "A differing opinion you care not to understand".

In reality, I do understand your opinion, far more than you realize. And I still find it insulting and disgusting. You want to perpetuate the idea that, in reality, men are too weak and inept to decide where and when they spill their seed, so they need to have "special rights" to decide how to rule the lives of others because of that, while decrying the existence of "special rights" for those other people.

You're nothing but an annoying, misogynistic hypocrite. And you deserve to be called to the carpet for it.

What you say about me makes no sense. All I want is the same rights to be involved in my childerens life that a woman would have.

I have all the responsibilities one could have thrust on them.what I dont have is any of the rights and/or freedoms.

I dont want victims at all. How many times have I said birth control is a human right. How many times have I said a child is a 50/50 situation.

Infernalist:trialpha: hardinparamedic: Because our society has deemed it unacceptable that a man can force a woman to undergo an invasive and physically and emotionally taxing procedure against her will.

This is the correct decision, and I doubt many are arguing against it.

But it raises the question - why is it then acceptable for the women (by nature of her decision to keep the child) to force a man to pay 18 years of child support (depending on the man's circumstances, physically and emotionally taxing) against his will?

Do we have a fair alternative to this?

Someone already mentioned the only fair alternative I've ever heard - that the man be given, up until a point, the ability to forfeit all parental rights / affiliation with the child. Details would likely get ugly - I would imagine the best way would be to not list him on the birth certificate at all, but that would mess up medical histories, etc.

Now, would this be good for society? Arguably no, but it is required for fairness. If you allow fairness to be dismissed for "the greater good", you open up bad arguments like "it's better for society for women to stay home and not work, thus they should not be permitted to work"

serpent_sky:Because women's rights are a strange thing. Women want absolute rights - which we absolutely should have over our own bodies - but can't see that men should have rights, too. The idea of forcing a woman into motherhood is unconscionable to most people, but the same people think compelling a man to fatherhood is "holding him accountable" and "living up to his responsibility." I don't see how the two go hand-in-hand. If the decision to abort or not is ultimately the woman's, as it should be because it is her body and her health on the line, then it should be her decision on how she'll support the kid if she has it. If a man truly wants nothing to do with it, he should be able to sign away all responsibility -- and rights.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Exhibit A: The Strawman Feminist.

You can do that. It's called signing away parental rights. And family judges tend to weigh it as a factor in determining child support.

However, the fact you chose to create a potential life, and then to argue that you should be able to force a woman to go through a disproportionate amount of physical and psychological/emotional trauma just because you don't want to have to deal with the consequences of doing so is insane.

Biological Ali:trialpha: hardinparamedic: Because our society has deemed it unacceptable that a man can force a woman to undergo an invasive and physically and emotionally taxing procedure against her will.

This is the correct decision, and I doubt many are arguing against it.

But it raises the question - why is it then acceptable for the women (by nature of her decision to keep the child) to force a man to pay 18 years of child support (depending on the man's circumstances, physically and emotionally taxing) against his will?

Child support isn't something women have forced on men - it's something that's there in the interests of the child. Women pay child support too, in cases where it's the man raising the child by himself.

That's all cool and stuff until you get states like Brownbackistan going after anonymous sperm donors for child support payments.

trialpha:Infernalist: trialpha: hardinparamedic: Because our society has deemed it unacceptable that a man can force a woman to undergo an invasive and physically and emotionally taxing procedure against her will.

This is the correct decision, and I doubt many are arguing against it.

But it raises the question - why is it then acceptable for the women (by nature of her decision to keep the child) to force a man to pay 18 years of child support (depending on the man's circumstances, physically and emotionally taxing) against his will?

Do we have a fair alternative to this?

Someone already mentioned the only fair alternative I've ever heard - that the man be given, up until a point, the ability to forfeit all parental rights / affiliation with the child. Details would likely get ugly - I would imagine the best way would be to not list him on the birth certificate at all, but that would mess up medical histories, etc.

Now, would this be good for society? Arguably no, but it is required for fairness. If you allow fairness to be dismissed for "the greater good", you open up bad arguments like "it's better for society for women to stay home and not work, thus they should not be permitted to work"

trialpha:Infernalist: trialpha: hardinparamedic: Because our society has deemed it unacceptable that a man can force a woman to undergo an invasive and physically and emotionally taxing procedure against her will.

This is the correct decision, and I doubt many are arguing against it.

But it raises the question - why is it then acceptable for the women (by nature of her decision to keep the child) to force a man to pay 18 years of child support (depending on the man's circumstances, physically and emotionally taxing) against his will?

Do we have a fair alternative to this?

Someone already mentioned the only fair alternative I've ever heard - that the man be given, up until a point, the ability to forfeit all parental rights / affiliation with the child. Details would likely get ugly - I would imagine the best way would be to not list him on the birth certificate at all, but that would mess up medical histories, etc.

Now, would this be good for society? Arguably no, but it is required for fairness. If you allow fairness to be dismissed for "the greater good", you open up bad arguments like "it's better for society for women to stay home and not work, thus they should not be permitted to work"

Again, the abdication of responsibility is 'not' a fair alternative to 'mandatory responsibility'. It's basically the polar opposite of 'mandatory responsibility'.

If there's another alternative out there that's 'fair' to the child, the mother and the father, by all means put it forth to be examined.

teenage mutant ninja rapist:Again. Birth control for everyone who wants it regardless of ages. My body my choice right.as far as womens rights goes. In north america its a dead issue. Women are given leeway and shown favoratism in every aspect of our society. From education to the legal system and everything in between.if women want to fight for other women. Go the fark to saudi arabia. Cause here in north america feminism = not so cleverly disguised sexism.Course ladies if you want to gang up on men your welcome to.but think of what would happen if as a gender men said "fark it. No more"Just saying. Us vs them is a stupid battle. But it is one that women cant win. Cant even really fight.equality is good. Sticking it to the opposite gender cause you heard things were hard for you gender generations ago is retarted.boys vs girls is something used by teachers in grade school.it is not a method with wich to conduct ones life

You do realize that, in the span of a single post, you've tried to simultaneously argue that:1) the culture here unfairly favors women, and discriminates against men in everything up to and including the legal system-but-2) if the men of the nation ever decided to change that, it would be a battle women can't possibly win...right?

hardinparamedic:Oh, I see. When someone points out how idiotic you're acting and talking, it's an "irrational phobia".

You're irrational because you are arguing against things that nobody in this thread is saying.

hardinparamedic:You're nothing but an annoying, misogynistic hypocrite. And you deserve to be called to the carpet for it.

Oh, there it is; I knew there was a reason why you describe sex as such a violent, controlling, vile act. I'm really sorry your womyn's studies major hasn't earned you the adoration of your female peers, though frankly I don't understand why you're trying so hard.

as far as womens rights goes. In north america its a dead issue. Women are given leeway and shown favoratism in every aspect of our society. From education to the legal system and everything in between.

if women want to fight for other women. Go the fark to saudi arabia. Cause here in north america feminism = not so cleverly disguised sexism.

Course ladies if you want to gang up on men your welcome to.but think of what would happen if as a gender men said "fark it. No more"

Just saying. Us vs them is a stupid battle. But it is one that women cant win. Cant even really fight.

equality is good. Sticking it to the opposite gender cause you heard things were hard for you gender generations ago is retarted.

boys vs girls is something used by teachers in grade school.it is not a method with wich to conduct ones life

10/10

10/10? Really?

my first perfect score! Is it getting dusty in here?

I would like to thank the people that made this thread possible. The biatchy feminists shopping for the perfect kitty at the pound.and the biatchy old guys that think birth control is a bad thing.

without both groups short sighted hypocritical nonsense none of this would be possible

It's revolting to see men whine about the one aspect of our society that is tilted in a woman's favor while ignoring the hundreds of ways the very opposite is true. Gold Spider, you may be male but you're no man.

teenage mutant ninja rapist:What you say about me makes no sense. All I want is the same rights to be involved in my childerens life that a woman would have.

And you have that right, to the point that fetus develops into a neonate and pops out of the woman's uterus. You do not have the right, on the other hand, to force that woman to undergo an emotionally and psychologically devastating medical procedure against her will, which carries risks up to and including death to the mother.

teenage mutant ninja rapist:I have all the responsibilities one could have thrust on them.what I dont have is any of the rights and/or freedoms.

And you have the right to legal recourse for that. Isn't America Great? It's where someone I love can't be forced to have an abortion because you decided to love it with no glove on it.

teenage mutant ninja rapist:I dont want victims at all. How many times have I said birth control is a human right. How many times have I said a child is a 50/50 situation.

And how many times does it have to be pointed out to you that a fetus, completely dependant on a woman's body for survival until that cord is cut at 24+ weeks, is not a 50/50 situation, and you do not have the right to force that decision on someone against their will?

This is not about birth control. If you cared about birth control, you'd have CHOSEN not to ejaculate into an unprotected woman's vagina after your four seconds of vigorous lovemaking.

hardinparamedic:and then to argue that you should be able to force a woman to go through a disproportionate amount of physical and psychological/emotional trauma just because you don't want to have to deal with the consequences of doing so is insane.

GoldSpider:Oh, there it is; I knew there was a reason why you describe sex as such a violent, controlling, vile act. I'm really sorry your womyn's studies major hasn't earned you the adoration of your female peers, though frankly I don't understand why you're trying so hard.

Sex is a vile, controlling, and violent act for me, but that's because I'm into BDSM.

hardinparamedic:You can do that. It's called signing away parental rights. And family judges tend to weigh it as a factor in determining child support.

However, the fact you chose to create a potential life, and then to argue that you should be able to force a woman to go through a disproportionate amount of physical and psychological/emotional trauma just because you don't want to have to deal with the consequences of doing so is insane.

In no way did I argue that the woman should be forced to go through anything! It's our bodies and our lives, and therefore, we have the ultimate say and choice.However, I think that when we make that choice, if the man does not want to come along for the ride, that should be his choice as well. While there is no way to equal it out if he wants to have a baby and the woman doesn't (because that would be completely unconscionable in every way, to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term and give birth against her will), there is a way to allow the man to walk away as if nothing ever happened - by allowing him to sign away all rights and responsibilities. It's not entirely equal to abortion, no, but it's the best and most fair solution I can think of.

I am very glad to have the right to choose what to do or not do with my body and life. If I somehow chose to have a child against the will of the man who got me pregnant, though, I think he should have the right to walk away. I think every woman and every man should have those rights, and if it's not the easiest choice for the woman, well, so be it. It was her choice to make.

serpent_sky:In no way did I argue that the woman should be forced to go through anything! It's our bodies and our lives, and therefore, we have the ultimate say and choice.However, I think that when we make that choice, if the man does not want to come along for the ride, that should be his choice as well. While there is no way to equal it out if he wants to have a baby and the woman doesn't (because that would be completely unconscionable in every way, to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term and give birth against her will), there is a way to allow the man to walk away as if nothing ever happened - by allowing him to sign away all rights and responsibilities. It's not entirely equal to abortion, no, but it's the best and most fair solution I can think of.

I am very glad to have the right to choose what to do or not do with my body and life. If I somehow chose to have a child against the will of the man who got me pregnant, though, I think he should have the right to walk away. I think every woman and every man should have those rights, and if it's not the easiest choice for the woman, well, so be it. It was her choice to make.

That's the point you're missing, though. It's not about you, or the man. It's about the offspring you created, and what's best for it.

as far as womens rights goes. In north america its a dead issue. Women are given leeway and shown favoratism in every aspect of our society. From education to the legal system and everything in between.

if women want to fight for other women. Go the fark to saudi arabia. Cause here in north america feminism = not so cleverly disguised sexism.

Course ladies if you want to gang up on men your welcome to.but think of what would happen if as a gender men said "fark it. No more"

Just saying. Us vs them is a stupid battle. But it is one that women cant win. Cant even really fight.

equality is good. Sticking it to the opposite gender cause you heard things were hard for you gender generations ago is retarted.

boys vs girls is something used by teachers in grade school.it is not a method with wich to conduct ones life

10/10

10/10? Really?

my first perfect score! Is it getting dusty in here?

I would like to thank the people that made this thread possible. The biatchy feminists shopping for the perfect kitty at the pound.and the biatchy old guys that think birth control is a bad thing.

without both groups short sighted hypocritical nonsense none of this would be possible

hardinparamedic:That's the point you're missing, though. It's not about you, or the man. It's about the offspring you created, and what's best for it.

Sorry, that's the woman who chose to have said offspring's problem to solve. With choice comes responsibility. We are lucky to have that choice, but if we make a choice that is difficult, well, we have to pick up the slack.

Why should a man be forced to pay for the choice the woman made? Why should he be forced to contribute to a world/life he has -- and wants -- nothing to do with, often at the expense of his actual, current life of his own choice and making?

hardinparamedic:teenage mutant ninja rapist: What you say about me makes no sense. All I want is the same rights to be involved in my childerens life that a woman would have.

And you have that right, to the point that fetus develops into a neonate and pops out of the woman's uterus. You do not have the right, on the other hand, to force that woman to undergo an emotionally and psychologically devastating medical procedure against her will, which carries risks up to and including death to the mother.

teenage mutant ninja rapist: I have all the responsibilities one could have thrust on them.what I dont have is any of the rights and/or freedoms.

And you have the right to legal recourse for that. Isn't America Great? It's where someone I love can't be forced to have an abortion because you decided to love it with no glove on it.

teenage mutant ninja rapist: I dont want victims at all. How many times have I said birth control is a human right. How many times have I said a child is a 50/50 situation.

And how many times does it have to be pointed out to you that a fetus, completely dependant on a woman's body for survival until that cord is cut at 24+ weeks, is not a 50/50 situation, and you do not have the right to force that decision on someone against their will?

This is not about birth control. If you cared about birth control, you'd have CHOSEN not to ejaculate into an unprotected woman's vagina after your four seconds of vigorous lovemaking.

teenage mutant ninja rapist: read more than 2 posts before you run your mouth

D'aww. You said something stupid and got called out on it.

4 seconds. Try 20 you bastard.if you must know I was with my ex for 3 years before she got pregnant. Family court ruined my life. I got a bag of clothes and shown the door. court was a female judge. Female lawyers and my ex. I was the only male in the room. Sounds sexist to me.

funny thing is. As soon as I was able to get my ex alone and to speak to her like a person with no lawyers or judges her and I ironed out most of our differences.legally I ow no child support. I also have no legal right to see my son.I pay child support every month. And skype my son every day. That girl is my best friend. Even if things got farked up between us. My son loves me and even though I got farked by a legal system against me. I walked away head held high. And fixed things with a common snese approach.

my ex agrees with me. Listening to a roomfull of women was the worst thing she ever did.soon as it became her and I everyhing was worked out.involving women lawyers and feminism farked up everything.

boys vs girls. Grade school spelling bee makes it work.

real life it farks everything up.but please tell me your opinion based of what you read and study.

my opinion is based off of fact/shiat that happend to me.

Go ahead and insult me. Laugh at mra'ssomeday you will experience real life. Till than enjoy your bubble

BarkingUnicorn:trialpha: Infernalist: trialpha: hardinparamedic: Because our society has deemed it unacceptable that a man can force a woman to undergo an invasive and physically and emotionally taxing procedure against her will.

This is the correct decision, and I doubt many are arguing against it.

But it raises the question - why is it then acceptable for the women (by nature of her decision to keep the child) to force a man to pay 18 years of child support (depending on the man's circumstances, physically and emotionally taxing) against his will?

Do we have a fair alternative to this?

Someone already mentioned the only fair alternative I've ever heard - that the man be given, up until a point, the ability to forfeit all parental rights / affiliation with the child. Details would likely get ugly - I would imagine the best way would be to not list him on the birth certificate at all, but that would mess up medical histories, etc.

Now, would this be good for society? Arguably no, but it is required for fairness. If you allow fairness to be dismissed for "the greater good", you open up bad arguments like "it's better for society for women to stay home and not work, thus they should not be permitted to work"

You are totally ignoring what's fair to the child.

Of course I am - it loses by nature of not being born. Otherwise, if you add it as a factor, then you're forced to ask why the woman is allowed to abort it at all - after all, that's not exactly fair to it.

If you want to consider all three parties, then perhaps the only fair scenario (sci-fi) would be this:

- The woman may, by nature of not being forced to carry an err... parasite if you will, inside of her, transfer it to a gestation tube- The child will then be born, and raised by the state- Both parents are then forced to pay child support to the state for 18 years.